All Activity

Nobody is saying they don't count against the cap, because yes, they technically do count against the cap as it's money the team is paying and it needs to be accounted for. But what you're not grasping it seems is that if a player gets $10 million guaranteed in their contract, whether they get literally $0 as a signing bonus or $8 million as a signing bonus, it doesn't change the overall cap hit of the contract, because cap hits are about the guaranteed money, not how much is paid up front. The only thing that how much is paid up front changes, is how the cap hit can be spread out amongst the years. So yes, technically there could end up being a slightly bigger cap hit in year 3 and 4 due to a bigger signing bonus, but if that is the case, it also means there will be a lesser cap hit in years 1 and 2 than there would have been with a smaller bonus. But over the length of the contract, the size of the signing bonus has literally zero affect on the overall cap hit of the contract, because THAT part of it is 100% about the guaranteed money and nothing else.

He could have the same year as 2024 and you still would be making excuses for him. So I guess we're even.

99% of my complaints generally are front office complaints. It may not appear that way always but that's where I have been for some time. It's also why I constantly talk about random parts the last several years.... to this day, if they were going to draft Bryce Young....I thought they needed to do specific things. They have literally done the opposite. In a certain world, I would LOVE an AT. A Bryce Young. An XL. All sorts of people. How they have chosen to put it all together here? Meh. I still think if Bryce Young is your QB....the easiest and obvious play for a team....would be a dynamic slot WR, a rec RB, and solid rec TE. Spread it out. Let him be the point guard. I still think this team is being built for a different type QB....one that a Jake Delhomme style QB would thrive more in. Which is in fact the heart of what Canales has been around and done. So I nitpick it all. If I had thought Bryce Young was going to rebound....I would have NEVER been all in on XL like I was. I was all in XL because I thought the BY experiment was about to over quick. Ladd would have made way more sense if you believed in BY IMO. I don't think this team did. I think Dave drafted XL because they were mentally ready to move on and did after 2 weeks. and I thought the Frank think was bologna from the jump. I just have hate the pairings and plan every since Rhule year 1. Rhule year 1 was the last time I really thought this team was in a good place to give it a go. It went horribly. But....the zoomed out plan was pretty logical all around. Rhule just was not ready and a clown on top of that. I still think the Dave, BY, XL, Tmac build 3 round pegs and a square one at the end of the day. Worst thing to happen to BY was to land in Carolina IMO. Which is often how the NFL plays out. Where you land and what the org does matters probably more than raw talent/ability often. I do not actually have a problem with Adam Thielen in a vacuum. He is overperforming in a vacuum all things considered.

Bryce Young could throw for 40 tds and 4500 yards this season and my gut instinct still says you would triple down on hating him.

They should just be predetermined slotted contracts. I feel like that was the intention of the current system, but they left too much room for interpretation about guaranteed money. I agree though. You play for who drafts you or you don't play.

Agreed, thanks for clarifying

2 greats. All Bundy and Bubba Smith.

Hell, my wife has picked up walking students on the way to school, uh-oh... I've given kids waters and Kleenexes, well damnit I'm a criminal.

Now that you mention it, those orange slices in the church leagues were basically pay to play.

That's basically what I said... If the guarantees are smaller, and/or the system is designed in such a way that balances the difference between rookies and vets, then the hit on the cap is mitigated. Yes, I realize that's what they were trying to do with the rookie wage scale, but obviously too many loopholes have evolved. It's time to modify the agreement (which probably won't happen), or we're just going to be in this position for the next half dozen years. I guess that I take a harder line. In my world, once you get drafted, you get drafted and play by the current rules. If you don't want to play by the rules then you'd just sit out until you do. You couldn't escape the situation by sitting out another year, you'd just have to play by the rules as they are, and not how you think that they should be. If gray areas arise, then the NFL and NFLPA would have to come to overarching solutions.

parents step in for pregame meals for my kid's team for away games. I am Teddy Bridgewater!!!

People only want to make a stink about it when it pertains to athletics. There are probably reasons for that, but that discussion is indeed a rabbit hole. I think that all students should be held to at least minimum standards academically so that they don't fall through the cracks, because most just aren't going to make it to (or even stay in) the pros. I've seen cases where kids are allowed to skate, slip and ultimately bust their heads because they thought that they were more "special" than they really were.

If the contract is fully guaranteed and a player goes bust, it puts the teams at a huge disadvantage from a cap perspective and impacts their ability to pay veteran players who have actually proven themselves.

Not fully understanding. I don't get why there has to be no cap for my point to be valid. In a perfect world, they can have a cap and have guaranteed rookie contracts. The two aren't mutually exclusive. It's just a matter of finding the sweet spot that makes most satisfied.

Like a lot of things in today's economy, market concentration is a huge issue in the vet space. Mars (yeah, the chocolate company) owns roughly half of them with their control of Banfield and VCA as well as numerous smaller chains. Oh, and all that Royal Canon food the vets are prescribing and recommending? Yeah, that's owned by Mars too. Don't even get me started on the racket that is "prescription" dog food and how incredibly uneducated the average vet is on basic pet nutrition. Back to the actual clinics... private equity ghouls who care about literally nothing but profit own another 30%. Now you're down to roughly 20-25% of clinics that aren't under the thumb of Mars or private equity.

I just listened to Devil in the Desert.

like any profession, a lot of them are very greedy and balloon up bills. My buddy is a vet. When he was first starting out he had BIG issues with the vet he was employed with because he was expected to drive up bills. He now owns his own practice driven by that very reason. Good man that wants to sleep good at night....doing what he set out to do at a young age (with the same reason in mind, to help animals and people). But per him, a HUGE % of small animal vets are just gouging the f out of people. like most things, I want the most mom and pop variety I can find. The bigger practice, like most businesses, it more likely is owned and operated to make as much money as possible at the end of the day.

But the point is these rookies haven't provent hey can play at the pro level. The rookie wage scale and reducing guarantees was a way to combat the cap impacts on top draft picks if / when they go bust. Think about how that affects the ability for a team to move on. Your point is only valid if there's no cap at all then the owners are either willing to pay or not.

Bingo. Weirdly this stuff always only applies to athletics.

This is the pearl clutching college sports fans held onto for decades. Glad to see it still going strong, just shifted to HS now. LOL

Yep, like I said, I don't mind guaranteeing them money, but make the contracts smaller amounts in order to minimize cap implications. I don't know about "half," the actual amounts, whether more or less than half, would have to be determined by the NFL and NFLPA (which will probably be highly contentious, if not "impossible"). I'm just for whatever leads to the best product on the field while also unaffecting my wallet. As an aside, the NFL owners are greedy bastards in my estimation. They're trying to keep a larger portion of the pie, but players' agents are greedy as well, and they've sewn seeds of greed among the players. It's not all their fault; we all know what our society has evolved into, but the NFL wants a bigger piece of our smaller pocketbooks and refuses to "negotiate" with us (that's why we don't have cheaper and more reasonable à la carte options to view games that they're gradually trying to migrate to paid TV), so fu<k 'em. And then on top of that we have guys trying to water down the product even more by feeding greed. Change the way things are done so that we can at least see players prove themselves on the field without throwing wrenches into the engine that pays guys that have proven they can play on a pro level.

So if one of the parents wants to buy the theatre group or the band lunch they should get banned?

OK, I didn't realize this was about high school, but...if I'm spending my personal money trying to help some kids out, then no one is going to tell me how to spend my money. I get enough of the government spending my money--allocating my tax dollars--to children who don't really need anything, and now they're trying to tell me how to spend my personal money? Sure, there are many other issues to consider and rabbit holes that we could go down due to ethical concerns because it concerns kids, and the need for transparency is extremely important, but maybe as opposed to trying to stop kids from benefitting in darkness, we need to open up the blinds (and blinders) a little bit so that they can benefit in the light. I get where you're coming from, but this is a loaded and layered issue, and I'm just trying to give you some food for thought.

I love that they are all bonding